logo Sign In

TheWanderingNomad

User Group
Members
Join date
20-Dec-2015
Last activity
20-Feb-2016
Posts
8

Post History

Post
#901201
Topic
Force Awakens or EU: which do you choose?
Time

Like one of the previous posters, I’m a fan of the Al Williamson daily comic strips from the early 1980s, which were republished in comic book format by Dark Horse. Ditto some of the original Marvel Comics, although it rapidly declined in quality towards the end of the run. Russ Manning’s early adventures are less interesting but have a certain charm.

I liked ‘Splinter of the Mind’s Eye’ and have recently discovered the Radio Dramas, which I almost prefer over the OT now (at least until the original versions are restored). The Star Wars radio drama is the best of the three. Empire is also good, though they didn’t really pull off Han and Leia’s romance. Han came over as a bit creepy. Jedi suffers from the lack of Mark Hamill & Billy Dee Williams.

I have read Brian Daley’s books but did read the comic version of ‘Han Solo at Stars’ End’. I was surprised they got away with calling a droid Bollux but I guess the American editors didn’t pick up on British slang…

I read the Timothy Zahn trilogy, which was entertaining but underwhelming. The clone Luke (Luuke?) and mad (cloned?) Jedi just seemed lazy. Thrawn had potential – using asteroids to bombard planets seemed an ingenious way to make up for the loss of a super weapon. But the idea of using the psychology of a species’ art to defeat them in battle seemed rather convoluted.

The Dark Empire series seemed to mark the downward spiral into ever more powerful super weapons. But it had some interesting concepts, new planets and ship designs, and generally I liked the art (bar Empire’s End). But it could have been better without a resurrected Palpatine and Boba Fett.

Post
#897236
Topic
The Force Awakens: Official Review Thread - ** SPOILERS **
Time

I thought they did a great job at casting especially when it comes to Daisy Ridley. Who would have thought that such an unknown would give such a great performance.

I thought she was quite ‘wooden’ very much like prequel characters but each to their own, must be difficult acting to thin air though.

You might be the only person on the planet who feels this way. It’s certainly not an “each their own” situation.

Several reviewers said she was quite wooden – The Evening Standard review really slated her.

Didn’t Daisy herself say JJ had criticised her at first? I also remember reading an article quoting Peter Mayhew saying he thought she was wooden at first but loosened up.

I definitely thought she was quite wooden in the first half of the film; several friends said the same. The scene on the freighter where she and Finn were running from the rathtars, where she puts her hand over her mouth, being the most cringeworthy example of this – school play level.

That’s not to say she didn’t adequately carry herself in other scenes. There did seem to be an improvement in her acting as the film progressed.

Post
#890640
Topic
The Force Awakens: Official Review Thread - ** SPOILERS **
Time

I saw the film again and enjoyed it more. I think there were a number of reasons.

Firstly, I saw it in IMAX 3D rather than ‘Real’ 3D, which was a far less intrusive format. The standard 3D really detracted from the cinema experience – it was too fake and too dark. I really advise anyone who hasn’t seen it yet to view it in IMAX or 2D.

Secondly, my viewing experience no longer had the burden of expectation. I could just enjoy it as a spectacle. I think it works as a ‘big dumb Hollywood movie’ – though it’s certainly better than say ‘Jurassic World’. It isn’t on a par with the original trilogy. But it’s definitely better than the Prequels, which I loathe. (I never thought it was that bad but was disappointed.)

That said, it doesn’t mean I take back any of my criticism of the film. It does hark back to ANH too much, it is too fast paced – I didn’t change my mind about that. But it is an enjoyable ride.

The main criticisms of the friend I went with, who is more of a casual fan, were: Starkiller Base being too much like another Death Star; not enough information about the state of the galaxy; and Daisy Ridley’s acting, which she thought was wooden at the beginning but got better later. She still enjoyed it though (and also thought it far superior to the Prequels).

I think for the average moviegoer and casual fans the criticisms we’ve discussed are an issue but they’re not a major issue and seem unlikely to impact on the film’s box office success.

Post
#887932
Topic
The Force Awakens: Official Review Thread - ** SPOILERS **
Time

Ronster said:

Plot was poorly handled, needed about another 30 minutes to allow the time to settle in. Hopefully an extended version will be made.

I disagree. The problem was it had too much plot.

I think it would have benefitted from cutting the smugglers’ freighter story, maybe even Maz’s castle, and developing everything else more. It rushed from one set piece to another.

Given the lack of tension involved in the destruction of the Starkiller base, it didn’t even need a superweapon element to the story. I would have preferred a different threat – for example, the First Order as intergalactic terrorists or carrying out stealth strikes in the heart of the republic – rather than them having such a powerful – but ultimately weak – weapon from the get go. Something that would have given more scope to better establish the characters of the lead villains. Instead they came across as a bunch of amateurs.

Post
#887892
Topic
The Force Awakens: Official Review Thread - ** SPOILERS **
Time

ZkinandBonez said:

TheWanderingNomad said:

SilverWook said:

TheWanderingNomad said:

The Resistance base looked far too much like a set than a real world location, especially compared to Hoth or Yavin.

You do know they used a real RAF military base for that, right?

Yes. & it doesn’t alter the fact it looked like a set. When I say ‘real world’ I mean within the context of the Star Wars universe. It was one step up from Dr Who using English quarries for alien planets in the 70s. The rather pedestrian way those scenes were shot didn’t help either.

Well, a lot of studio lots used to be aircraft hangars, so that does kind of makes sense. And a lot of studio lots are built on the same principle. But I think it would be more correct to say that sets look like hangars, rather than saying that the hangars look like sets.

I didn’t say that: those are your words. Compare Hoth and Yavin, they had a much different sense of scale and other-worldliness. I think the Resistance base could have done with some matt paintings or enhancement of the landscape.

Visually, it wasn’t very interesting. &, as I said, I think that’s partly how it’s shot. It had a very TV movie/series aesthetic.

Post
#887870
Topic
The Force Awakens: Official Review Thread - ** SPOILERS **
Time

SilverWook said:

TheWanderingNomad said:

The Resistance base looked far too much like a set than a real world location, especially compared to Hoth or Yavin.

You do know they used a real RAF military base for that, right?

Yes. & it doesn’t alter the fact it looked like a set. When I say ‘real world’ I mean within the context of the Star Wars universe. It was one step up from Dr Who using English quarries for alien planets in the 70s. The rather pedestrian way those scenes were shot didn’t help either.

Post
#887848
Topic
The Force Awakens: Official Review Thread - ** SPOILERS **
Time

It was a disappointment for me but for different reasons than the Prequels. Unlike Episodes I-III, it didn’t drag but while I wasn’t bored, TFA was a hollow and rather lifeless experience: unoriginal, paper-thin plot and characterisation, too much fan-service and too much of a pastiche of the Original Trilogy. It felt like flat-pack filmmaking – too self-conscious, lacking in vision or ambition – an update of Star Wars with bits of Empire and Jedi tacked on.

Abrams may have recognised what was wrong with the Prequels but he went from one extreme – dull, boring exposition, people standing and talking, sitting and talking, too much boring politics – to the other – everyone running around with little to no character or plot development.

The pacing of the film was one-note. There was no build-up, no tension, no suspense. Things just happened one after the other until it was over. The score was so forgettable and I barely noticed it. Compare that to how it piled on the tension in the original Death Star trench battle.

In Star Wars, we had a set up of how important the Death Star was – the stolen plans, the destruction of Alderaan – and the political state of the galaxy – Obi Wan talking about the destruction of the Jedi and the Imperial officers on the Death Star discussing the disbanding of the Imperial Senate. In contrast, the Starkiller base was just there – there was no sense that the Resistance was trying to find it. You cared about the destruction of Alderaan because it was Leia’s home planet. Why should we care about the never-before-mentioned Hosnian system? (And how did they see the destruction from Maz’s castle?)

Despite blowing up an entire solar system, the Starkiller base never felt like a threat. It seemed ridiculously easy to take out compared to the original Death Star. Compare with Jedi where it took time and effort to take out the shield generator, or with the first film where rescuing Leia and safely delivering the droids to the rebellion took up much of the film. In TFA, they basically walked into the Starkiller base, captured Phamsa (who seemed to serve no purpose other than selling action figures) and turned off the shield.

Similarly, the early reveal of Kylo’s parentage removed an opportunity for a tenser climax. I thought it would have been more effective if his fate had been unknown since the attack on the Jedi academy and his reveal being a shock. I think Snoke should have been kept out of this film, or his face been concealed – at least until they could make him look better than a crappy CGI Gollum/Voldermort hybrid.

Boyega and Driver seemed to make the best of the very limited hand they were dealt. Kylo came rather too close on occasions to bratty Anakin, though Driver is a far better actor than Hayden Christensen. Daisy Ridley’s acting was rather wooden at times but Rey was so much of a Mary Sue that there was little for her to work with. I wasn’t as bothered as others by her Force abilities, the ‘Force back’ implies she had some training and her memories were suppressed or, maybe, wiped, and Kylo was clearly injured before the lightsabre duels. But neither she nor the other leads felt like adequately fleshed out characters.

The original actors were poorly or under utilised. It felt like we needed an Obi Wan figure, given the title of the film, rather than Han. Carrie Fisher had no real purpose. There was none of the old spark between her and Ford. I’d have preferred some conflict on their reunion to suggest the depth of their loss/hurt but there was nothing. I don’t really want to talk about her appearance or her voice but I will say it might have been kinder to leave her out of the film.

The use of the original actors was made all the more problematic by the film seeming like a remake rather than a sequel. Their presence was rather jarring – like they’d wandered into a fanfic. If they wanted to do a reboot they should have gone all the way and started from scratch.

I can’t get over how the plot was so negligible. It sounds like they should have let Michael Arndt have another year, or two years, to craft something more original. (Presumably Disney couldn’t wait to cash in.) I’m not surprised Lawrence Kasdan is walking away from this.

The Prequels had jarring clashes of tone – awkwardly mixing comedy and tragedy – this just had one tone throughout. Where the Prequels were plodding, this was breathless – and didn’t give you room to get a feel for the new universe.

Finally, while the special effects were more convincing than the Prequels, some of them seemed pretty low-rent – like something I’d expect on Dr Who or Babylon 5 rather than a blockbuster film. The Resistance base looked far too much like a set than a real world location, especially compared to Hoth or Yavin. It could have done with a matt painting backdrop. Don’t see it in 3D, it’s far too dark and the action too fast for the format. It really took me out of the film.

In short, too much hype, not enough substance.